Analysis: Iraq oil law in limbo
Hassan Jumaa Awad, president of the Iraqi Federation of Oil Unions, an umbrella group representing more than 26,000 workers, said their complaints with the law rest primarily on the fear foreign companies will have too much access to — and possibly ownership of — Iraq’s oil.
“First of all, we are against the production sharing agreements,” Awad said. PSAs are deals whereby a company provides capital investment in the project, sells enough of the first oil produced to recoup its costs, and then splits the rest of the oil with the government. Companies can “book” their reserves, bolstering their portfolios. “These kinds of contracts … we don’t like it at all,” Awad, speaking via a translator, told UPI from a mobile phone in Rome. He ‘ s on a speaking tour to generate support and spread information about the law. There is also debate on companion bills to the hydrocarbons framework — a more formal common title to the oil law, which was approved by the Iraqi Cabinet in February. The law has, however, run into opposition from all sides — including on how the revenue will be collected and redistributed throughout the country and whether the federal or regional government has control over certain fields.
I’m afraid I don’t have enough to say for a proper diary. I just want to share this because it is so rare we are offered a glimpse into the internal debates taking place in Iraq.
When the Dems and Repubs both talk about benchmarks requiring an Iraqi law for sharing oil revenues, what the really mean is a law for sharing them with US Oil companies.
It seems our oil companies have bought off the local Kurdish war lords, so expect to hear more talk of partition.
Also, Sadr was quoted in the news today saying it is time for us to go. I wonder if he is planning an attack on our supply lines.
I wonder if Bush will use that as an excuse to attack Iran.
There is quite a lot of opposition to the proposed hydrocarbon law within Iraq, in fact.
This is why a majority of Parliament was willing to sign a (non-binding) letter earlier this monthsaying they want the US troops to set a time table and leave. According to Raed Jarrar and Joshua Holland on Alternet:
One provision of that Iraq Supplemental Bill — backed up by statements from Bush himself — basically says that if the Iraqi government asks us to leave, we will. Sounds good — but Bush has said a lot of things he didn’t mean. In fact, I’m sure that passing that hydrocarbon law is one of the “benchmarks” the Iraqi government has to meet under the bill.
But opposition to the bill is growing steadily. I read an AP report this morning that said that Moqtada Al Sadr is back in Iraq, returned from Iran. Sadr is one of the stronger voices for Iraqi nationalism, and he has a strong faction in the Parliament. He’s described as “radical” in western news reports, but I suspect that descriptor has less to do with his theology, and everything to do with his anti-occupation political stance. And his popularity — due to his family history, and his anti-occupation rhetoric, he has become something of a underground folk hero for many Shia Iraqis. Given this Administration’s reputation for truth telling, and that of their media pawns, I’m inclined to take any MSM report about Al Sadr with a whole shaker of salt…
I’ve been of the opinion for some time that the civil war and sectarian violence in Iraq actually has very little to do with the religious sects within Islam, and a LOT to do with the struggle for political powerand economic benefits — and the control of Iraq’s greatest natural resources. Yes, the sectarian divides are there, but that’s because the sectarian lines follow tribal and political alliances. But retribution violence aside, the issues at stake are not theological — they’re economic and political. The only Iraqis who would support the hydrocarbon law as written by the Big Oil companies would be the handful who will end up profiting personally by it–and they will need US protection (plus their own personal militias) to live to enjoy it.
It is in the interest of the neocons and Big Oil to keep Iraq splintered and to encourage sectarian violence — to prevent the country from developing the unity necessary to mount a serious opposition to their long-term agenda. (and obvously, it gives the Republican candidates something to rattle their toy sabers over). But maybe with the hydrocarbon law, the neocons have tried to grab more cookies than they can hold and still get their hand out of the monkey trap.
We’ll see…..